Feedback of antibiotic prescribing in primary care (FAPPC) trial : results of a real-world cluster randomized controlled trial in Scotland, UK

Marwick, Charis A and Hossain, Anower and Nogueira, Rita and Sneddon, Jacqueline and Kavanagh, Kim and Bennie, Marion and Seaton, R Andrew and Guthrie, Bruce and Malcolm, William (2022) Feedback of antibiotic prescribing in primary care (FAPPC) trial : results of a real-world cluster randomized controlled trial in Scotland, UK. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 77 (12). pp. 3291-3300. dkac317. ISSN 0305-7453 (https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkac317)

[thumbnail of Marwick-etal-JAC-2022-Feedback-of-antibiotic-prescribing-in-primary-care-FAPPC-trial]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Marwick_etal_JAC_2022_Feedback_of_antibiotic_prescribing_in_primary_care_FAPPC_trial.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 logo
Download (630kB)| Preview

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the effect of general practice-level prescribing feedback on antibiotic prescribing in a real-world pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial Methods Three hundred and forty general practices in four territorial Health Boards in NHS Scotland were randomized in Quarter 1, 2016 to receive four quarterly antibiotic-prescribing feedback reports or not, from Quarter 2, 2016 to Quarter 1, 2017. Reports included different clinical topics, benchmarking against national and health board rates, and behavioural messaging with improvement actions. The primary outcome was total antibiotic prescribing rate. There were 16 secondary prescribing outcomes and 5 hospital admission outcomes (potential adverse effects of reduced prescribing). The main evaluation timepoint was 1 year after the final report (Quarter 1, 2018), with an additional evaluation in the quarter after the final report (Quarter 2, 2017). Routine administrative NHS data were used to generate the feedback reports and analyse the effects. Results Total antibiotic prescribing rates were lower at the main evaluation timepoint in both intervention (1.83 versus baseline 1.93 prescriptions/1000 patients/day) and control (1.90 versus baseline 1.98) practices, with no evidence of intervention effect [adjusted rate ratio (ARR) 0.98 (95% CI 0.94–1.02; P = 0.35)]. At the additional timepoint, adjusted total antibiotic prescribing rates were 1.67 and 1.73 prescriptions/1000 patients/day, with evidence of a small intervention effect, ARR 0.99 (0.98–1.00; P = 0.03). Conclusions This well-designed, practice-level antibiotic-prescribing feedback had limited evidence of additional effects in the context of decreasing antibiotic prescribing and an established national stewardship programme.

ORCID iDs

Marwick, Charis A, Hossain, Anower, Nogueira, Rita, Sneddon, Jacqueline, Kavanagh, Kim, Bennie, Marion ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4046-629X, Seaton, R Andrew, Guthrie, Bruce and Malcolm, William;
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)